This is a work in progress. I'm posting it so you see where my headspace is at. Note that sections are in alphabetical order by header...
...oh, and tables in my master doc may not come out well here.
AIRCRAFT AND AIRSHIPS
The nations of Nova Terra are aware of the significance of aircraft and airships in naval warfare. However, a combination of factors has prevented any significant reverse-engineering to date:
1. Lack of an existing civilian user-base from which to draw pilots, manufacturers, etc.
2. Lack of suitable terrain for aircraft and airship experimentation and utility, given that the cities are sealed and very little expansion to land has taken place.
3. The presence of large, aggressive flying animals on land, which have frequently attacked and damaged or destroyed experimental aircraft and airships to date.
Consequently, while modern industry could likely build historical 1930s-era metal-hulled monoplanes, the personnel side of the sector is stuck in the early 1900s – a few particularly bold aviators figuring out how to fly.
Aircraft are not available as military units as play starts. Players may write about experimental wheeled- or float-plane tests if they wish. At some point during play, the Moderator will determine that there is a critical mass of military need, available facilities for trials, and trained manpower to allow military usage.
BACKSTORY
Centuries ago, humanity arrived here.
They had left the homeworld in slow ships, cross the void to expand humanity's footprint in the galaxy. They left united in their cause, optimistic for their future. They had left war and political division behind. They had left environmental degradation behind.
It was not until they arrived here that they understood just how difficult it would be. The fly-by probes that preceded their arrival had accurately measured the land/water ratio, the atmosphere, and noted the relatively weak magnetic fields around the planet. What they couldn't observe was the lethality of the planet's animal and plant life.
The world's shallow seas and ancient continents were teeming with relatively simple, yet highly competitive and evolved food-chains. The continents were occupied by a nightmarish biosphere in which lethal carnivores preyed upon herbivores, the herbivores defended themselves with natural defences, and the plant life slowly preyed upon both.
The first human colony attempted to settle a temperate continental land mass, and was an abject failure. Colonists fell to terrestrial and airborne predators, carnivorous plants, wind-blown fungi, and natural hazards they had forgotten how to deal with. Within four years, the last human from the first colony had perished.
The colonization effort could not be aborted. Other ships were on their way, and there was no way for them to turn around or continue on to another star...
CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
This sim will employ a basic set of cultural characteristics to facilitate realistic interaction with NPCs – other nations, as well as the player's bureaucracy and population. When creating his nation, the player selects a value from 0 to 99, with 0 being "least" and 99 being "Most":
Chauvinism: A quantification of how the culture views others. It combines fear of the unknown, eagerness for new knowledge, arrogance, caution, etc. The higher the RC, the less tolerant and eager for relations a culture will be.
Militarism: A quantification of a culture's aptness to use military force to resolve difficulties. It combines ferocity, timidity, military tradition, courage, etc. The higher this is, the more likely the race is to resort to war in a threat situation, and the more willing it is to accept casualties in war.
Determination: A measure of cultural obstinacy, and how likely it is to persevere in a course of action once adopted. It may be thought of as stubbornness and may reduce the willingness of the culture's military units to surrender, but should be confused with militancy.
ECONOMICS
Cities
A player nation consists of a number of cities. At the start of the game, the player determines how many cities there are, where they are, and assigns economic output and an export product to each one.
A city is an arcuate or ring-shaped structure built on the seafloor in coastal water and extending well above sea-level. The inner curve of the city's arcuate form, or the interior of its ring, offers protected berthing and harbours for shipping. Think Waterworld's "atoll", only more high tech and several thousand times larger.
A city is a self-contained, sealed environment for the protection of its inhabitants from the planet's virulent biosphere. A city is largely self-contained, and would consist of large segments of condominium-style housing, office complexes, shopping malls, vertical farms, and industrial facilities. Cities are variously powered by solar arrays, tidal power generation, geothermal or hydrocarbons. They produce their own freshwater, extract nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and argon from the air and water, and produce some quantities of biodiesel from the native biosphere.
Each city generates an exportable product:
-Biodiesel on a larger scale
-Steel
-Consumer goods
-Soil (for terraforming)
New cities can be created during the Economic Turn of each year. To do so, pay $10 if the city is wholly underwater, and $1 less per square kilometre of terraformed land or $5 if it is on land. During this first year, the city generates no economic output, as it is under construction. In subsequent Economic Turns, the player may assign new economic output to the new city, determines its export, and may install naval infrastructure there.
National Economy
The national economy is the sum of economic output from a player's cities, plus the value of trade conducted by the nation.
Economic output is changed each Economic Turn according to two factors: the highest tax rate charged by the player in the previous year, and the global economic trend as determined by the player. The player assigns the net increase (or decrease, if necessary) to individual cities as he sees fit.
Trade is revenue derived from a formal trade agreement with another nation. This is worth 5% of the other nation's economic output (that is, his cities) at the beginning of the previous year. Players can maintain as many trade agreements as they can afford.
If a nation has declared or maintained an embargo against the other nation in a trade agreement, neither earns revenue from that trade agreement during the current year.
Budgets and Taxes
The player's budget is obtained by taxing the nation's economy. The tax rate is set in the Economic Turn at the beginning of the year. Taxes may be set at up to 2% per game turn (6% per year) without issue; above this, there is a chance of a popular uprising depending on the circumstances.
A player can run an operating surplus of up to 1% of his economy without issue. If higher, the Mod rolls against the nation's Cultural Determination; on a failed roll, the entire surplus is taken away by the central government for other stuff (in other words – lost).
A player may not run deficits. If he needs cash in a crisis, he may borrow from another player, at terms to be negotiated with and enforced by the other player. Alternately, he may increase taxes.
Using the Budget
Player budgets represent the military, foreign affairs, and intelligence portions of their nation's overall budget. He may:
-Build, maintain, repair, and refit ships
-Build and maintain ports and shipyards
-Build and maintain marine units
-Establish embassies and trade and military agreements
-Engage in covert activities against other nations
COVERT OPERATIONS
A nation may undertake covert operations using its budget. This is reported in game turn reports as "Covert Operations"; a more detailed account is provided via PM to the Moderator.
Options for espionage include:
Propaganda
Technically, this is only "covert" in the sense that the nation deploying it doesn't necessarily advertise what it is doing. That said, the dollar figure involved – compared to that of other covert operations – will indicate to third parties that something is up.
A dollar spent on propaganda can influence a specific die roll to be made against another nation's cultural characteristics. This could be used to positively influence a roll by a prospective ally or partner, or it could be used negatively against a roll to be made by a player's rival. The effect of these funds is not cumulative; it is expended once that specific roll is made.
The occupier of a foreign city may also use propaganda (in this, case, actual media output, cash, bribes, and economic incentives) to change the cultural characteristics of the occupied population. The effect of usage is ongoing. This can not be used against populations occupied by other nations unless the occupier specifically allows the player to interact with that population.
A nation can also use propaganda on its own population to change its own cultural characteristics. This, too, is a permanent change.
Espionage
A covert op costs $0.1. Players are limited to three such missions per turn in peacetime – five if formally at war. Four options are available to a player for any specific mission
-Espionage: Entitles the nation to ask the moderator one question about another nation that can be answered in a strictly factual manner (yes/no, numbers, locations, etc) without the moderator having to "guess" or "characterize" the response. The Moderator will make a roll and provide an answer which may be correct. Depending on the outcome, the Moderator may also provide feedback to the target.
-Economic Sabotage: A sabotage mission attempts to damage another nation's economic output. The player specifies the target city and pays $0.1. The Moderator rolls to determine what effect the effort has, and advises the player (and possibly the target...) what the outcome appears to have been.
-Military Sabotage: A mission attempts to attach a conventional limpet mine to another nation's ship and detonate it at a specific time or place. The Moderator rolls to determine what effect the effort has, and advises the player (and possibly the target...) what the outcome appears to have been.
-Arms Supply: A mission attempts to deliver the equivalent of one company of light infantry weapons, ammo, and gear to an occupied population. The Moderator rolls to determine what effect the effort has, and advises the player (and possibly the target...) what the outcome appears to have been.
Counter-Espionage
A nation may mount a counter-espionage operation above and beyond its basic security measures. This costs $0.1, and must be directed at a specific other nation. The Moderator will make a roll and advise the player whether or not an espionage mission was detected, and if so, what the outcome appears to have been. Players are limited to three such missions per turn in peacetime – five if formally at war.
INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
Steelworks: Permits __ amount of shipbuilding
Boutiques: Produces unique consumer goods such as jewellery, clothes, and books.
Dirt Farm: Produces a "terrestrial" soil mix for use in terraforming operations.
Construction: Produces ports, shipyards, or cities away from existing facilities.
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Nations can seek out a variety of formal relationships with other nations. However, establishing these formal relationships generally costs money. It also requires overcoming cultural differences. The various possible states of international relations – and their costs and complexities – are listed below.
Hostility
This represents two nations that are at war. A declaration of war from one nation to another renders all trade and military agreements void. Should the two nations come to terms of peace again, their relationship will be re-set to Informal Relations.
Occupation
This represents a situation in which one nation has established military control over a city belonging to another nation.
If the garrison of the city is less than one company per $2 (or fraction thereof), the city is at risk of an uprising (determined by the Mod in each turn). Economic activity is limited to the essentials – food, water, air – and the city produces no actual economic output. Should an uprising take place, the population will form mobs of lightly-armed militia and use improvised and cached weapons to attempt to drive out the occupiers.
If the occupier maintains a ratio of one company per $2 (or fraction thereof) of the city's economic output, there is no chance of an uprising; the city's (sullen) population remains peaceful, and the city yields one half of its normal economic output to the occupier. More formal relations (trade or military agreements) can not yet be established with the city, however.
The occupier may use propaganda to change the Cultural characteristics of the occupied population. Once the occupied population's stats match the occupier's, the occupier may seek a partnership with the occupied city. In this case, only the occupied city must roll against its Chauvinism and Militarism. If/when the rolls are made, the occupier pays the normal costs of establishing a partnership, and only then can withdraw his garrison without risk of uprising.
Informal Relations
This is the default setting for any two nations at the start of the sim. The two nations in question have no government to government interaction with each other: There are no embassies or consulates, no legal agreements, no formalized processes for discussing trade or defence issues, and no means to exchange knowledge or technology. There is likely awareness of the other nation, and possibly small-scale business interaction between the two nations.
A nation may choose to permanently or temporarily suspend more formal relations if circumstances justify it.
Prerequisite: Nil
Requirement: Nil
Cost: Nil.
Formal Relations
The two governments maintain a formal process for interacting with each other, through embassies and consulates. This allows formal discussion of trade, defence, and other matters. To establish an embassy in another nation, both the player and the prospective host must succeed a die roll against their Chauvinism. The player establishing the embassy then pays a one-time cost of $1 to establish an embassy and the formal lines of communication.
Prerequisite: Nil
Requirements: Successful Chauvinism Rolls by host and guest nations.
Cost: $1 one-time by guest.
Non-Aggression Pact
This is an agreement by two nations not to attack each other. It does not require any positive cooperation and, indeed, may be concluded between rivals.
Non-aggression pacts last for as long as they are specified or honored.
Pre-requisite: Formal Relations with a PC or NPC
Requirements: Successful Chauvinsim and failed Militarism rolls by both nations.
Trade Agreement
The two governments permit and even encourage the flow of commerce between each other. As most states are largely self-sufficient in basic essentials like food or power, the trade generally consists of specialty goods such as consumer goods. To implement a trade agreement, both nations must set up customs offices, additional port facilities, etc. In the turn after the start-up fee has been fully paid, each economy receives a bonus to general income of 5% of the other nation's basic economic output in the previous year.
An embargo occurs when one nation unilaterally shuts down trade. To re-establish trade at a later date, successful rolls will be necessary, but the dollar cost does not need to be re-paid.
Prerequisite: Formal Relations with a PC or NPC.
Requirements: Successful Chauvinism rolls by both nations
Cost: $ = 1% of own economy, by each partner, to implement.
Military Alliance
The two governments vow to come to each other's aid in the event of third-party attack. They may also choose to cooperate in aggressive activity.
The two governments will pay a modest cost to establish and maintain military links.
Prerequisite: Formal Relations
Requirements: Successful Militarism rolls by both nations.
Cost: $1 one-time, and $0.10 per turn to maintain
Partnership
The two governments integrate foreign affairs and trade policy, essentially behaving as one unit so far as third parties are concerned. A PC/NPC partnership essentially sees the NPC taken over as a puppet of the PC. This is a relatively expensive proposition, requiring the creation and maintenance of diplomatic, trade, military, and other oversight entities and joint governance structures.
After ten years of uninterrupted partnership, the player may formally amalgamate the NPC into his nation, at which point the NPC ceases to become a separate entity in any sense. At that time, the ongoing costs associated with the partnership are terminated.
Prerequisite: Trade and Military Alliances
Requirements: Successful Chauvinism and Militarism rolls by both nations
Cost: 5% of the smaller economy, by the player nation only, and $4.9 ongoing (for a total of $5 counting the pre-existing military alliance).
MARINE UNITS
Marine units are bought in companies or battalions. Warships are expected to have a minimal contingent of marines aboard as part of their complement – guarding magazines and small-arms lockers, possibly manning a gun. However, the ship will not have a significant troop-landing ability unless one or more of the units below are embarked.
Light Infantry: Are equipped with light automatic weapons, grenades, and light crew-served weapons. These units are configured for urban fighting and boarding or security of warships. They are highly leg-mobile, and tend to cause limited amounts of collateral damage.
Heavy Infantry: Have a much greater proportion of heavy weapons such as heavy machine guns, grenade launchers, mortars, and flamethrowers. These are units configured for holding defensive positions, supporting light infantry, and sanitizing land of local biota. They are less leg-mobile, and more apt to cause collateral damage.
Headquarters: This represents command and support leg-mobile elements of a battalion. Its attack factor represents additional crew-served weapons and the benefits of coordination that a headquarters will bring to up to nine other companies. Headquarters units may spot for naval gunfire.
APC: These are general purpose wheeled transports, designed to carry troops or cargo. They are wholly enclosed against light small-arms fire and are NBC resistant. They have limited amphibious capability, and generally include a light crew-served weapon for fire-support and defensive purposes. To mechanize a light or heavy infantry unit, pair it with an APC unit of the same size.
Guntrack: These are tracked assault vehicles designed to bring large volumes of firepower against fixed targets or uncleared local biota where naval artillery can not be brought to bear. They typically mount a heavy weapon (mortars, small breech-loading gun, heavy automatic weapon, or flamethrower) with one or two light machine-guns. They are armoured against small-arms fire and are NBC resistent but their weight precludes them from being amphibious. In an urban setting, they are apt to cause significant collateral damage.
Unit Cost Weight Attack Defence Note
LI Cpy $0.01 50 t 1 1 100 men + kit
HI Cpy $0.01 50 t 2 1 100 men + kit
HQ Cpy $0.02 50 t 1 1 100 men + kit
APC Cpy $0.03 120 t 1 2 10 vehicles (~VAB/BTR)
GT Cpy $0.05 120 t 2 3 10 vehicles (~Scorpion/Scimitar)
Players may build battalions from up to ten companies, one (and only one) of which must be a headquarters company. For example, he might build a mechanized infantry battalion consisting of one HQ, three LI, one HI, and five APC companies ($0.21, AF/DF = 12/15, 850 t)
Marine Upkeep
Mobilized and fully capable of combat operations: $ = 5% of build cost, per turn.
Active and capable of routine police/sentry duty and limited combat ops: $ = 2.5% of build cost, per turn.
Reserve; incapable of combat duty; a cheap way of maintaining troops on the books: $ = 1% of build cost, per turn.
Marine Supply
As marine units are substantially smaller than the warships and transports which will move them, supply is disregarded.
Marine Quality
For simplicity, all marine units are considered to have the same troop quality. However, units will have their attack factors halved in the first turn after they are raised or mobilized from reserve, reflecting some unfamiliarity with effective combat techniques.
Marine Speed
Given the limited terrain and long turns of this game, marine speed is not currently defined.
NAVAL COMBAT RULES
To be determined.
MARINE COMBAT RULES
To be determined. Generally speaking a comparison of attacker's attack factors to defender's defence factor, accounting for the situation (amphib assault, city fighting) in question. Probably one combat impulse per week, with effectiveness degrading over time.
NAVAL INFRASTRUCTURE
There are two types of naval infrastructure to be operated and tracked by a player, shipyards and ports.
Shipyards build, refit, and repair ships. Shipyards have a building capacity, expressed in tonnage per turn, that includes construction, refit, and repair work. Smaller shipyards will have hard limits on the largest possible ship that can be constructed there, and the types of vessels that can be constructed.
Shipyards may be expanded by paying the difference in costs between current and future price. Expansion takes two turns per level, or until the cost is fully paid, whichever is longer. Shipyard building capacity is halved during this time period.
Unused shipyard capacity is not transferrable to other facilities or bankable in any way.
Shipyard Table:
Size Build Capacity per turn Max. Ship Size Possible Tech Limitations Cost
S0 1,000 999 t ND No DD, MTB, SS, CV, or ships with belt/deck armor $5
S1 2,000 5,999 t ND - $10
S2 5,000 - - $25
S3 10,000 - - $50
S4 20,000 - - $100
S5 50,000 - - $250
Ports function as bases, and provide operational and logistical support to ships.
These are purchased individually. Shipyards and ports can share a common location, but are not required to be of equal capability in such a case.
Upon purchase, the Moderator will assign a harbour depth to either a shipyard or a port. This is the maximum safe drought that any ship in the harbour may have without risking grounding or rock-strikes. Ports may be dredged at a cost of ($X) * (Port Size) per metre.
Port Table
Size Support Capacity Cost
P0 1,000 t $2 ($0 at a city)
P1 10,000 t $4
P2 50,000 t $16
P3 100,000 t $25
P4 500,000 t $100
P5 1,000,000 t $200
SHIP CONSTRUCTION
Ships are built in shipyards.
Warship costs and construction times are based on their normal-load displacement. This reflects the reality that ships with larger bunkers will have greater physical size than ships with smaller bunkers and the same light displacement. The length, width, and draught of a ship is irrelevant for determining production costs, times, and which ports may construct them.
Ship Types
Type Definition Cost
Warship Built to 1.00 HS; 2.0% or more of normal displacement is armament and armor, including misc. weight allocated as such. $1 per 1,000 t normal displacement; round to nearest cent
Destroyer Built to 0.50 CSHS; Must be 30.00 knots or more. $1.25 per 1,000 t normal
Submarine Semi- and full-submersible vessels $2.00 per 1,000 t normal
MTB Fast, semi-planing attack craft that can not be simmed in SS $2.00 per 1,000 t normal
Auxiliary/Civilian Built to 1.00 HS; less than 2.0% of normal displacement is armament and armor, including misc. weight allocated as such $0.25 per 1,000 t normal
Ship Construction Times
A ship is completed when a minimum amount of time has passed and their dollar cost has been fully paid.
0-249 t 4 months
250 – 499 t 8 months
500 – 999 t 12 months
1,000 – 1,999 t 16 months
2,000 – 5,999 t 20 months
6,000 – 11,999 t 24 months
12,000 – 19,999 t 28 months
20,000 – 29,999 t 32 months
30,000 – 39,999 t 36 months
40,000 – 49,999 t 40 months
50,000 – 59,000 t 44 months
MTB (all sizes) 8 months
These completion times are assumed to include trails and work-ups.
A ship is considered to be launched at the end of the turn in which it became 50% complete. At this point it is non-functional, but may be towed to another location.
SHIP DAMAGE AND REPAIRS
Ships are repaired at shipyards. Repair activity counts against a shipyard's build capacity.
Unless specified by the Moderator in a battle report, they can only be repaired at a shipyard that could have built the ship.
A ship that is in perfect condition is said to be at 100%. As damage is inflicted on the ship, the percentage rating decreases. When the ship reaches 0%, it sinks. However - reaching a state of 0% does not (usually) mean that the ship has been completely and utterly destroyed. Consequently, it is generally easier and faster to repair a ship than to build an identical ship from scratch.
The cost of repairing a ship is: (Original Cash Cost)*(% Damaged)*(0.5)
The time required to repair the ship is: (Original Build Time)*(% Damaged)*(0.5), rounded up to the full turn.
SHIP DESIGN GUIDELINES
Where in doubt, rely on common sense and historical practice.
This is a "living" document; entries may be added as events or discussions warrant them.
Block-coefficients
0.40 is the absolute minimum. Coefficients should be reflective of the size and speed of the vessel.
Engine Year
Ships are to be designed with engine year = 1950. It is assumed that no significant enhancement of turbine technology will take place during the course of the sim.
Hoists
Hoists generally become necessary for a gun at around 150mm bore diameter, where shells are too heavy to lift at reasonable rates by hand. They may be used in smaller weapons at the player's discrestion.
Hull Strength
Minimum 0.50 cross-sectional hull strength for ships built to Destroyer standards; otherwise, composite hull strength of 1.00 is recommended. Ships not meeting this criteria are at risk of moderator-inflicted incidents.
Length to Beam Ratio
Ratios should be reflective of the size and speed of the vessel.
Length to Beam Ratios of 12:1 (smaller, faster ships) or 10:1 (larger or slower ships) or less are reasonable and do not risk moderator-inflicted incidents. Ships approaching circular shape risk moderator-inflicted performance issues.
Miscellaneous Weights
This will be added to as new items are suggested or become available.
Boats: Typical ship's boats are part of fittings. Extra boats, landing craft, or attack craft require 2 t of miscellaneous weight per tonne of boat weight: The difference accounts for cranes and hull reinforcements.
Coalling/Oiling Gear: Considered part of ship's fittings.
Fire Control: Assumed to be a part of ship's fittings.
Fluff: Flag facilities, medical facilities, climatization, extra pumps, and so forth are assigned weight as the player sees fit. Moderators may assign performance bonuses to the ship under specific circumstances if the facilities warrant it.
Marine Units: For short-term embarkment (< 24 hrs), assign 1 t of miscellaneous weight per tonne of the unit. This is basically men or vehicles stuck on a deck with minimal comfort, shelter, or amenities. For longer-term embarkment, assign 4 t per tonne of unit weight. Weight does not need to be specified as for infantry or vehicle units; it is assumed the space is multi-functional.
Radar and Remote-Hearing Devices: 25 t per installation is recommended, though the effectiveness of these devices is questionable.
Radio: Considered a part of ship's fittings.
Torpedoes: Specify 6 metre length for weapons up to 550 mm, and 7 metres for weapons larger.
Army Units: For short-term embarkment (< 24 hrs), assign 1 t of miscellaneous weight per tonne of the unit. This is basically men or vehicles stuck on a deck with minimal comfort, shelter, or amenities. For longer-term embarkment, assign 4 t per tonne of unit weight. Weight does not need to be specified as for infantry or vehicle units; it is assumed the space is multi-functional.
Seakeeping
Ocean-going vessels built to warship or auxiliary standards should have a seakeeping value of 1.00 or more. Smaller vessels on quiet water (rivers) may have seakeeping of 0.50 or more.
Ships built to destroyer standards may have seakeeping as low as 0.50, as SS will not satisfactorily produce historical destroyer designs otherwise.
Shafts
Four shafts are the most that may be installed aboard a ship.
Springsharp
We use SS3. If the ship can not be designed from scratch in SS3 using our design guidelines and naval technology trees, the design is invalid.
Note that SS3 does not correctly include the weight of torpedos, ASW weapons, and mines. When designing a ship, note the tonnage of each and duplicate it in the appropriate Miscellaneous Weight field.
Stability
A ship should have stability of at least 1.00. Higher values will provide protection against flooding-induced capsizing.
Steadiness
Note this is a relative value; a steadiness value does not correlate directly to the same percent of shells hitting a target. Values of 50% are entirely acceptable. Values approaching 100% represent steadiness similar to fixed, terrestrial gun emplacements.
Transom Sterns
Transom sterns are valid for use in fast combatants. They should not be used for slow vessels, and may detract from their performance in SS.
SHIP OVERHAULS AND REFITS
It is possible to overhaul a ship to return it to "good as built" condition. Alternately, if new equipment is desired in addition to maintain the ship in good order, one can opt to give a ship a basic refit, a refurbishment, or reconstruction.
Overhauls and Refits usually take place at shipyards that could have built the ship, and count against the shipyard's build capacity, but note exceptions below.
OverhaulsAn overhaul is not a refit - no "new" equipment is installed. It merely returns the ship to "as good as built" status - retaining the same effectiveness and technology that it did when originally constructed. It is possible for a ship to go through its entire career undergoing only overhauls, and it will remain just as effective as it did when it was young; however, the ship might well be completely obsolescent in comparison to its newer counterparts.
A ship is due for an overhaul ten years after its date of completion or most recent overhaul or refurbishment.
An overhaul costs 10% of the original dollar cost of construction. It requires one quarter of its original construction time, rounding up to the nearest whole turn.
Basic Refit
A basic refit is limited to changing external fittings, specifically: above-deck torpedoes, minelaying/sweeping gear, simple deck-mounted guns with ammo lockers, radio. Temporary alterations to superstructure - dummy funnels and disguises, or emergency berthing - are also possible.
The cost of the refit is strictly that of the specific items being changed. If items are being swapped back and forth and not discarded – say, the dummy funnel – it is only paid for once.
The time required is considered to be zero, though in practice it will last hours to days and the Moderator may rule that refits can be interrupted by combat.
If the equipment can be manhandled or installed with the ship's own cranes, no external assistance is required. Otherwise, any shipyard, port, or a suitable second ship will suffice.
Refurbishments
A refurbishment is a more comprehensive refit which allows for replacement of obsolete or undesired fittings as well as overhauling any original equipment that remains. Since a ship can get by on overhauls through its entire career, a refurbishment is never mandatory. However, a ship that is refurbished is likely to be more effective than a ship that is merely overhauled.
A refurbishment costs 20% of the original dollar cost of construction, plus the dollar cost of new components described below. Refurbishments take one quarter of the ship's original build time, rounding up to full turns.
See below for a description of what can and can not be done in a refurbishment. Note that "tonnage" refers to those in a Springstyle report's "Distribution of weights at normal displacement"
Armament and machinery
All deck mounts and casemates, and secondary turret/barbettes, can be moved, added or deleted; main battery turret/barbettes can be replaced by turret/barbettes of equal or smaller roller diameter or other components allowed during refurbishments. Newer machinery can be installed, but the weight can not exceed the previous set of machinery.
$ cost = $0.002 per tonne, rounded to the nearest cent.
Armor and functional miscellaneous weight
New armor decks, external belts, and external bulges for torpedo defence (not "torpedo bulkheads") can be added. Existing armor decks, external belts, or weapon armor can be replaced or removed (not increased). Functional miscellaneous weight can be added at the expense of non-functional miscellaneous weight or savings from removed components.
$ cost = $0.001 per tonne, rounded to the nearest cent.
Hull, fittings & equipment
The waterline may be raised or lowered by 10%. The trim may be changed.
$ cost = $0.0002 * normal displacement, rounded to the nearest cent.
Fuel, ammunition & stores; non-functional miscellaneous weight
Types of fuel can partially or wholly changed, but overall bunkerage not increased. Changes to number and size of main-battery shells in magazines, but overall weight not increased. Non-functional miscellaneous weight can be increased or decreased.
$ cost = $0.0005 per tonne, rounded to the nearest cent.
Reconstruction
This is the most elaborate type of refit, and marks a comprehensive change to the ship's internal structure or hull form.
The base cost of a reconstruction is 25% of the original cost, plus changes specified below. Refurbishments take 25% of the ship's original minimum time of construction plus one month per 1,000 t of new components added to the ship, rounded up to a whole turn.
Armament and machinery
Main battery turret/barbettes can be raised. Machinery spaces can be enlarged at the expense of other components.
$ cost = $0.002 per tonne, rounded to the nearest cent.
Armor and functional miscellaneous weight
Internal belts can be replaced or removed. Torpedo Bulkheads can be added.
$ cost = $0.001 per tonne, rounded to the nearest cent.
Hull, fittings & equipment
The bow may be lengthened by up to 5% of overall length. A new section may be added amidships, up to 5% of overall length.
$ cost = $0.002 per tonne of change in normal displacement (whether positive or negative)
Fuel, ammunition & stores; non-functional miscellaneous weight
Overall bunkerage can be increased. Overall weight of main battery magazine can be increased.
$ cost = $0.0005 per tonne, rounded to the nearest cent.
SHIP SCRAPPING
Scrapping a ship takes 25% of the time originally required to construct it, rounding up to whole turns.
Scrapping takes place at a shipyard that could have built it, but does not count against the shipyard's build capacity.
Specific fittings may be removed from a ship for re-use in future ships. The player must make note of this at the time of scrapping.
The scrap value of a ship is: 0.25 * (ship's original cost - cost of removed fittings). The player earns back this value in the turn following completion of scrapping.
Components removed from a ship during refurbishment or reconstruction can also be scrapped.
Damaged components removed from a ship during repairs can be scrapped, but their value is halved.
SHIP UPKEEP
Ships require constant minor repairs and material replacements in order to remaining functioning. This effort increases as the ship spends more time at sea.
There are three stages of readiness, with associated upkeep costs:
Mobilized: The ship is in all respects ready for immediate military operations, and spends considerable time at sea. Upkeep is 4% of construction cost, per turn.
Active: The ship can undertake limited military operations immediately, and will only take a few days to become completely combat ready. It spends the majority of the time in harbour. Upkeep is 2% of construction cost, per turn.
Reserve: The ship is anchored in a secure location, with a minimal cadre of crew conserving its equipment and undertaking essential maintenance. The ship is not capable of undertaking immediate operations. Upkeep is 0.5% of construction cost, per turn.
SIM YEAR AND TURNS
The sim year consists of an economics turn and three game turns.
Economics Turn
The Economics Turn is 0 days in duration. The player:
1. Determines the actual tax rate applied over the course of the previous year, rounding up to the nearest whole number.
2. Is informed by the Moderator of the global economic growth rate for the past year.
3. Determines his own net economic growth and increases the size of his economy accordingly.
4. Determines the tax rate to be levied for the current year.
5. Checks to determine access to commodities, if applicable.
6. Posts an Economic Report summarizing #1 – 5 above.
Game Turn
The player:
1. Pays for new construction/refits/repairs, and posts a minimum of length, beam, draught, and # of barbettes for new designs
2. For ships considered launched, posts full SS report of the ship
3. Pays for existing construction/refits/repairs
4. Pays for new infrastructure, reverse engineering of tech, and other expenses, as required
5. Determines exploration and diplomacy orders
6. Posts a Turn Report summarizing #1-5 above.
7. PMs war orders to the Mod.
8. Posts news (optional but recommended)
9. Updates encyclopedia
10. Receives decisions/exploration reports/diplomatic reports/war reports from Mod.
TECHNOLOGY
Most naval technology, at least in the near term, will be reverse-engineering using a combination of some historical data (covering up to Jane's WWII) and some experience with limited operational naval technology.
It is presumed that player states have done the bulk of the basic reverse-engineering work in the years immediately prior to the start date. It is not necessary for players to track development of individual systems in-game. This is assumed to be happening in the background.
Pre-Starting Technology
The nations of Nova Terra have had to build ships for mercantile, territorial sanitization, and policing purposes. Consequently, player nations begin play with the following tech operational on completed ships:
-All Springsharp machinery options, with engine year = 1950
-Breach-loading anti-surface Naval artillery up to 155 mm / 6.1" bore, using deck mounts with or without hoists. Mounts may be armoured on the face, sides, and around the hoists. Machine-guns may be considered anti-air weapons.
-HE and SAP shells.
-Starshells and searchlights.
-Hulls built to 1.00 hull strength, with cruiser or transom sterns
-Depth charges and depth charge throwers
-WW1 era sonar/ASDIC and short-range surface radar
-Submarines, with deck guns but not torpedoes [guns needed for anti-critter protection]
-Ramped landing craft
-Army units
Starting Technology
Ships laid down subsequent to the starting date of the game may make use of the following technology:
-Other naval artillery up to 450 mm bore, in deck mounts or turret/barbette, with pre-WW2 era FC. .
-Armored hulls (Deck/belt/CT, including AoN and sloped belt options and AP shells)
-Non-homing torpedoes up to 610mm diameter; up to quintuple carriages.
-Contact mine warfare (mines and towed minesweeping gear)
-Pre-WW2 type MTBs (all types as one)
-Destroyers of up to 2,000 t light
Tech Not Immediately Available for Research
It is assumed that the development of these systems has not yet been considered necessary, based on a lack of experience to demonstrate otherwise. When in-game events cause the development of a system to become warranted, the Mod will indicate the time and dollar cost associated with it – and, if applicable, which players may conduct the work.
Torpedo Bulkheads
Capped shells and decapping armor
AA and DP guns
Radar-directed fire control
Missiles and rockets
Hedgehog/Squid/Limbo type ASW weapons
Aircraft
Well-decks
Long range air and surface-search radar
Long-range ASDIC/sonar
Magnetic mines and degaussing equipment
Underway refuelling
Larger destroyers
Newer MTBs
TERRAFORMING
As Nova Terra has its own, competitive biosphere, it is not possible to terraform it simply by planting terrestrial seeds in the grown. Instead, a player must destroy the existing flora and fauna and then replace it wholesale with a terrestrial flora/fauna package.
In practice, terraforming a square kilometre of land requires the dedicated deployment of one infantry company, one engineering company, and the support of one Dirt Farm. There is no specific dollar cost. The process has a high but not automatic success rate; failure and troop losses can occur.
The actual steps involved – not that a player has to know it – are:
Shoot and Cut
A company of light or heavy infantry provide security and shoot down macrofauna while a company of engineers cuts down trees and other flora. Time: 1 months.
Fortify and Mulch
A company of light or heavy infantry erects razor-wire fences around the perimeter of the area to keep out fauna while the engineer company burns or mulchs the felled plants and sterilizes the soil. Time: 2 months
Recover
The infantry unit erects a concrete wall around the perimeter of the area to block plant growth, while the engineers receive soil [sterilized marine sediment, terrestrial compost, seed and insect package] from a dirt farm and spread it over the sterilized native soil. Time: 1 month.
...and I have not updated anything in the past week or so, so not everything we've discussed or that I've agreed upon is necessarily reflect in what's there. Flooded basement and Christmas parties are my excuse.
LOL... good excuses!
How's the draining of Lake Rocky coming along, BTW? Hope that too much wasn't lost.
Lake Rocky is slowly receding - it helps that it hasn't rained much and the ground's starting to freeze up. That's good, as I ratcheted up my right hand some while hammering through the concrete above what will be the sump hole. Lost a few jars knocked over, and the potatos in that one bin are iffy (~20 lbs). Could be worse.
Anyway - thoughts on the rules? It looks like a lot, but a lot of that's stuff - like International Relations - that helps me as Mod be consistent in my activity.
I know there are some changes coming, so I'll go towards the things that are new:
Point #1: International Relations sound like it's straight out of Civ-series game. I think they will keep players honest with the way that they play their nations, and will make awkward cross-cultural player alliances a lot less likely. It'll also encourage some serious roleplaying in order to change things we might regret.
Point #2: Trade agreements giving players the possibility of extra money for an investment is very good; but it can potentially cause a lot more entanglement in wartime and will quickly cause small wars to become global. This will, as in real life, become a balancing act very fast.
Point #3: Refit costs look affordable... will encourage things to be refitted and reused in an environment that may or may not use treaties to create such an environment. I like that idea.
Perhaps technology could start out in the 1920s or 1930s instead of 1950? There is no room for improvement if the ships start with 1950s technology to start with.
Quote from: Delta Force on December 13, 2011, 01:17:14 AM
Perhaps technology could start out in the 1920s or 1930s instead of 1950? There is no room for improvement if the ships start with 1950s technology to start with.
I think that this is the most logical thing- start in, say, 1920 and then have tech advance in roughly 5-year increments. The trigger could be something in-game... probably an influential city-state trying something new technologically (not a PC state unless some serious die rolls are involved), or a battle that forces a major shift in tactics.
Quote from: Carthaginian on December 12, 2011, 08:10:43 PM
I know there are some changes coming, so I'll go towards the things that are new:
Point #1: International Relations sound like it's straight out of Civ-series game. I think they will keep players honest with the way that they play their nations, and will make awkward cross-cultural player alliances a lot less likely. It'll also encourage some serious roleplaying in order to change things we might regret.
It's me borrowing as closely from Imperial Starfire as I can remember. You can see now why I was interested in the Cultural Characteristics stuff.
QuotePoint #2: Trade agreements giving players the possibility of extra money for an investment is very good; but it can potentially cause a lot more entanglement in wartime and will quickly cause small wars to become global. This will, as in real life, become a balancing act very fast.
It'll make for interesting politics; it allows to quantify the use of embargos as a soft-power tool; and yes, it gives y'all extra money once you implement them.
QuotePoint #3: Refit costs look affordable... will encourage things to be refitted and reused in an environment that may or may not use treaties to create such an environment. I like that idea.
I'd be down with merging refurbishment and reconstruction into one larger category if folks wanted - a generic, "We're ripping the guts out" deal.
So my questions/comments:
Is there a cap on the Cultural Characteristic points, or are we allowed to pick any value that we wish?
Any further thoughts on how the starting number of cities will work?
I like having the option to change CC's with a cash infusion. Would there be a limit on how far a given category could swing?
Is there more info on industrial facilities?
Diplomatic stuff looks good. Same with army stuff.
With the shipyard, is the listed build capacity per turn a per-ship or global limit?
Would a non-type 0 port constructed at a city have a cost reduction for the pre-existing facilities?
Construction rules look good.
Turns are to be in four-month intervals?
No torpedos at game start?
Will we have to pay for the development of different guns and torps as in N3?
Armor on starting ships?
Terraforming looks good.
Undecided on CC points. Starfire just let you pick what you want, as I recall.
You'll get X economic output, and will allocated it amongst Y cities. I'll establish some range for what Y can be - don't want players too spread out or too concentrated. On that note - do y'all want to start with the same economic output, or do you want me to randomly assign each of you a number from a range (say, $3,000 to $5,000)?
A limit on CC change in one year would be reasonable. Over a long period of decades, I see no reason to limit it absolutely.
Industrial facilities still in the works - had not factored in the idea of turbine plants, etc as somebody suggested.
Build capacity for shipyards is a global figure. An S1 could put 2,000 t into one ship, or 250 t into eight ships, etc - with a maximum size of 5,999 t for any one of those ships.
Good question on port costs. Sounds reasonable at first blush.
Correct, a year will consist of the Economic Turn and three Game Turns.
No torpedos at the start; in the absence of naval combat, nobody spent money on them.
For tech, I'm inclined simply to stick with the list of what's allowed and let you use what you want from that list. Obviously, we've had discussion about engine years, and I've heard concern about immediately allowing big-arse guns. We'd have to sort out how industrial facilities play into this.
No armor on pre-existing ships, save for weapons.
I like the variable starting economies, but think the range should be smaller as opposed to $2000. Maybe have ~$4000 with a + or - $500 done randomly?
I think that paying for the development of weapons would be a good way to go. For startup how about everyone gets ~2-3 guns of <=155mm for free (to be used on startup ships) and $X for guns (and mounts?) that would be available for new ships at the start with a restriction for guns of the boar diameter must be <=305mm with the caliber no more then L45, and for torpedoes of <= ~450mm (18") diameter. Then a table similar to the one used for N3 would be used for how the guns could be improved. Torpedoes would have increments of development as well. IMO, as long as we keep the concepts that define construction known, and limit needed research to actual items of tech (guns, ect), that requiring there research is not a bad thing.
OK... another small suggestion- allow for greater flexibility in torpedo sizes!
Submarine torpedoes have often been much shorter than their cousins on surface vessels. As we will be 'starting from zero' with our submarine programs, it might be nice to be able to build small subs with shorter range torpedoes initially (and indeed, throughout the game). Here are my suggestions:
TORPEDOES
1.) The length of a torpedo is determined by overall length in METERS (guys like me will just have to deal) and the diameter of a torpedo is determined by overall diameter in CENTIMETERS.
2.) A torpedo must be at least 5m in length, and will have a maximum range of 1000m X length in meters. A torpedo cannot exceed 10m in length, and will have a maximum range of 10,000m.
3.) A torpedo must be at least 400mm in diameter, and no larger than 600mm in diameter. Torpedoes of 400mm-450mm suffer a -1000m penalty to range and torpedoes of 550mm-600mm gain a +1000m bonus to range, if compared to other torpedoes of similar length.
That could be the basis for a good, simple torpedo rule-set.
Tweaking the Industrial facilities to include a sort of range of options for folks. I'm not really sure I want to get into the weeds so far as different ship parts are concerned, but this may offer a reasonable compromise. The arsenal option may offset the need for gun/torpedo R&D, as players will not be able to add new weapons willy-nilly.
Note the assumption that starting economies are ~$4000, give or take. There's a balance to be sought between concentration of economic power and ability to have different industries.
INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
Any city with an economic output of $200 or more has the efficiency of scale to support one industry with in-game effects. A player selects these for pre-existing cities, or designates them as the city grows to $200 in-play:
-Aircraft Works: Can produce aircraft. At the start of the game, this has no military application; the work is strictly experimental. Once aircraft are permitted as military equipment, it will allow construction of some quantity of aircraft.
-Arsenal: Can manufacture guns or torpedos in two specific calibres (in any mount configuration). Production can be shifted from one weapon to another, but this requires a year of down-time to retool.
-Boutiques: Produces unique consumer goods such as jewellery, clothes, and books. Increases the value of trade deals by 1% each (that is, 3% to 4% with one boutique).
-Construction: Can construct one city, port, or shipyard away from existing facilities.
-Dirt Farm: Produces a "terrestrial" soil mix sufficient for 1 km2 of terraforming each turn.
-Machinery Plant: Allows nation to manufacture turbines two years in advance of the nominal engine year. Must specify whether for 1.00 HS or 0.50 CSHS ships.
-Shipyards and/or Ports: A city with a shipyard and/or port of Type 2 or larger counts this as its industry. A city can host both a shipyard and a port, and it does not matter whether the city is smaller or larger than $200.
-Steelworks: Allows construction of ships. A nation without steelworks must import steel from another nation with steelworks.
I like those ideas, Rock, but for clarification... The CONSTRUCTION option states that the city can construct a shipyard/port/city 'away from existing facilities.'
1.) How long would this take- and I know we are at the 'SWAG' stage on times?
2.) Can a city build at it's own location?
3.) Can a city swap between specialties with a one year cooldown, or is it fixed when set?
1. Construction time of shipyards, I think, is set out in "Naval Infrastructure". Ah, yes: two game turns per level. I don't have a piece in for ports; it'd be about the same.
City construction time shows up in "Cities". Pay the start-up cost in an Economic turn, and in the next one (a year later), it can have economic output assigned to it. That would also extend to industries, if large enough to support one. Rather than having Brooklyn build Queens, it'd be New York expanding a bit.
2. A city building at its own location would simply be captured as an increase in its own economic output.
3. Some transition should be allowed...
Question.
Rule structure creates a default city size of $200; this is good and workable. It's also implied that cities don't have to be that size - that they can be smaller, or that they can grow beyond it.
What happens, in regards to production facilities, with a city that reaches $400? If it had Boutiques originally, does it still only count as one such, or two? Or is it possible to slot something else, like Construction, into the 'new' slot?
That's a good question, and one I need to grapple with. Again, I don't want to set up a system that encourages concentration of everybody's assets into a few easily defended cities...
Left to my own devices, I think I'd probably build 13 settlements, twelve 'small towns' and a single primate city (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate_city) wherein one would find, well, every industry except dirt-farming. This would carry the implicit risk that if the latter falls, Croatoa is no longer a viable nation, and frankly, I'm fine with that.
If a single $1600 settlement is too large, well, I'm fine with that, too. I'm implicitly intending that Roanoke was built in the very earliest days of colonization, and that even if it were desired, replicating the city's infrastructure would be impossible, so learning that it was never practicable is hardly going to be a shock. Depending how the map looks, I might or might not be able to get the same cultural effect by clustering individual cities into a 'metropolitan area'...
I suspect that the 'best' way to incentivize decentralization would be to just say that most of a city's defenses come free with its construction... and that those defenses do not scale with population size past the first $200. This'd mean that larger cities are either proportionally less protected than smaller ones, or that the construction and operation costs of their defenses come straight out of the national budget in a way that smaller ones don't.
Obviously, this won't stop roleplayers, but I think that's a feature, not a bug...
an idea that struck me on this subject earlier. What if adding in the ability to have more then one complex is still determent by the $ value of the city, but the values at which they become available increases at some non-linear rate. This would give players the ability to have more then one complex per city, but it would hit a point where it would become more economically sound to build a new city for acquiring additional complexes. It does not introduce a hard cap, but more of a soft one.
I agree- city growth should slow as it get's larger.
Frankly, in this environment space will be at a very high premium and the more room that you have taken up by people, the less room that there will be for industrial development. If you have a big city with a large population, it will eventually be so crowded that no new industry will be built simply because there will be no room left in which to build.
People cam be stacked on top of each other for thousands of feet- but factories... not so much!
Quote from: snip on December 15, 2011, 08:50:05 PM
an idea that struck me on this subject earlier. What if adding in the ability to have more then one complex is still determent by the $ value of the city, but the values at which they become available increases at some non-linear rate. This would give players the ability to have more then one complex per city, but it would hit a point where it would become more economically sound to build a new city for acquiring additional complexes. It does not introduce a hard cap, but more of a soft one.
So a city with a $200 economy can have 1 industry slot and when it reaches $450 (an additional $250) it gets a second industry slot, and when it reaches $750 it gets a third... like that? Because then it makes more sense for you to build smaller cities to $200 and a little more rather than concentrate on a massive city with $1600 economy that only has 5 industry slots rather than 7 or 8 if you had spread the wealth around.
My question was actually going to be about the Arsenals:
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 15, 2011, 11:19:38 AM
The arsenal option may offset the need for gun/torpedo R&D, as players will not be able to add new weapons willy-nilly. [Note: I just noticed this sentence]
-snip-
-Arsenal: Can manufacture guns or torpedos in two specific calibres (in any mount configuration). Production can be shifted from one weapon to another, but this requires a year of down-time to retool.
My understanding is that this limits the owner of that particular arsenal to just those two gun/mount types unless we purchase them from someone else. And is this an unlimited amount of that gun? Or its cost/weight as determined in SS?
A single arsenal would only produce two models of guns or torpedos, but you could have more than one arsenal scattered amongst your cities - if I've got my analogies right, like Vickers and Armstrong in the UK.
I don't see a reason to restrict weapon numbers for the lower caliber stuff. We could cap the ability to produce larger caliber weapons.
Further questions.
1. Will it be possible to increase dirt production with directed research, as well as by building new settlements devoted to it?
2. The terraforming description mentions the use of engineering details; are these military specialist troops who don't happen to be listed in that section, or a 'free' benefit of having the dirt farm in the first place?
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 03:42:21 AM
A single arsenal would only produce two models of guns or torpedos, but you could have more than one arsenal scattered amongst your cities - if I've got my analogies right, like Vickers and Armstrong in the UK.
I don't see a reason to restrict weapon numbers for the lower caliber stuff. We could cap the ability to produce larger caliber weapons.
Any restrictions with respect to changing over an Arsenal to produce other stuff? Time? Cost?
Michael
Additional dirt farming may be an option, and since you're interested in building on land, some transportation infrastructure rules will be necessary as well.
There will be an engineering unit add to the marine unit listing.
I think Jamie asked about arsenal change-overs earlier. I'm inclined to think it can switch to new weapons, with suitable down-time to develop and re-tool for the new weapon - figure perhaps a year transitioning between weapons. Production of the arsenal's other weapon wouldn't be affected.
I wasn't looking to apply a dollar cost to the process.
I am still not clear on how the cities effect economics or how the resources are to work.
1) What do you get when you 'buy' a city? How many people and GDP does it get?
2) Who chooses the resources?
3) How much does is cost to upgrade resources production?
Michael
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 06:06:23 AM
I think Jamie asked about arsenal change-overs earlier. I'm inclined to think it can switch to new weapons, with suitable down-time to develop and re-tool for the new weapon - figure perhaps a year transitioning between weapons. Production of the arsenal's other weapon wouldn't be affected.
I wasn't looking to apply a dollar cost to the process.
Must have missed that, thanks for the answer.
Michael
No problem - I'm here to answer.
Quote from: miketr on December 16, 2011, 06:07:10 AM
I am still not clear on how the cities effect economics or how the resources are to work.
1) What do you get when you 'buy' a city? How many people and GDP does it get?
2) Who chooses the resources?
3) How much does is cost to upgrade resources production?
Michael
1. The $20 or less that a player pays for a new city is basically the cost of constructing its basic infrastructure. The civilian sector builds the rest of it. The potential benefits to the player are:
-Physical occupation of the area in which the city is located.
-Decentralizing his economy to additional locations.
-Once the city is large enough, an industry.
While I think the $4000 starting economy is equal to around 20 million people, we aren't going to track population in the game.
2. Players will choose the industry of any city they build during play. They will probably also be choosing the industry of their existing cities as the game starts (I might roll some of them - still contemplating). I'll determine NPC industries.
3. At the moment, the only form of resource production upgrade is the notion of allowing multiple industries per city. The cost for that is to be determined.
I envision the current industry system to accomplish a couple of things:
-Quantify that the player has or does not have access to key commodities, without getting into the nitty-gritty of how much he has and how much he uses.
-Limit weapons research and construction without applying dollar costs that are, in the grand scheme of things, pretty inconsequential to a player's budget anyway.
-Provide a bit of "color" to the player's nation, by allowing him to determine whether his focus is on military power, trade, or expansion.
If a player desires more industry, then his options are:
-Start with a number of small cities, and let the economy grow until those cities can claim industries
-Start new cities once play begins
-Grab other people's cities.
Rocky, are you sure about the name? It sounds wrong to me. I think Terra Nova would be better.
I would also like an answer to the question of multiple industries per city, because otherwise as I understand it, a city with a port or shipyard could be nothing else.
I really hope we don't start with 1950s engines and I can't say I like how guns and torpedoes might be handled (especially the upper and lower limits are too arbitrary), but let's see how they come along.
That said I'm looking forward to see how it turns out.
I'm open to names. I didn't want people getting confused with that television show called "Terra Nova". We could call it, "Rocky's Deathworld Naval Carnage Extravaganza" if y'all wish.
I don't think we'll start with 1950 engines. Seems to be a fair bit of opposition. Probably start around 1920 or 1925 - I'm not really wondered that this sim would run a full 25 or 30 years.
I figure something like Darman's suggestion for cities with multiple industries will come 'round. Just need to ponder the details of the numbers.
Keep the comments coming, guys. I'll see if I can finalize the rules set by Christmas.
If we start with an economy of at least $3500 that is about 17 industries per person (averaged out, assuming each city is exactly $200). That seems like a lot to me. Maybe make the threshold for industries higher? Perhaps $500 instead of $200?
Thoughts, y'all?
I don't really think the existing numbers are too much at all; at two models per arsenal, you'll need several arsenals to produce a complete range for a fleet, and one square kilometer per soil factory per year is, if anything, even less of a factor. Certainly some industries are more 'efficient' than that, but that's almost certainly there for a reason, and IMHO, 17-23 is a good fit between being able to afford the basics and being able to customize things.
I don't think we should have more than a handful of starting cities. I don't see the space for much more on the map either.
So here are my ideas for weapons limits:
- they should include any known real weapon and rounded up to next "nice" limit
For torpedoes that means:
- the smallest torpedos should be allowed to be of ~30 cm diameter and only a few meters in length (think of the very early Whiteheads)
- the biggest torpedos should be allowed to have a diameter of 65 to 70 cm or 28" (think of the Japanese WW2 "long lance" and the German WW1 J/9s)
- 10 m length limit seems reasonable
Carthaginian idea isn't bad, but too simple IMO.
I would expect a torpedo range to be directly proportional to the length and also to the diameter (maybe as a sqare root?). Also important max speed and multiple speed settings (Range~v-2), and warhead size.
I would happily invent a formula and a tool for easy use if you are interested.
For guns that means:
460 mm guns should be allowed, at least 19". Some might argue that 20", 520 mm and 21" might have made it onto ships as well. I would vote for 55 cm upper limit. If someone wants to put a mortar (<30cal) on a ship then 60 cm should be allowed as well.
I have some ideas how to regulate this, but I'm not going to put much effort into it if noone is interested. Same goes for engine rules/tech tree.
...I sincerely doubt that a City will occupy an entire square on the current drafts of our maps.
By a couple of orders of magnitude.
Quote from: Valles on December 16, 2011, 09:04:02 AM
I don't really think the existing numbers are too much at all; at two models per arsenal, you'll need several arsenals to produce a complete range for a fleet, and one square kilometer per soil factory per year is, if anything, even less of a factor. Certainly some industries are more 'efficient' than that, but that's almost certainly there for a reason, and IMHO, 17-23 is a good fit between being able to afford the basics and being able to customize things.
I agree that we will each need several arsenals to have a variety of weapons. But also, in the beginning, wouldn't it be more interesting if you were limited in the types of guns you could make? As an example, if you have 2 arsenals, and you choose to build twin mount and hoist 8 inch guns, twin 14in torpedo mounts, single deck mount 6inch guns, and single deck mount 4in guns. Now you have to figure out how to design a light cruiser. Do you put 6in guns on her with 4in secondaries? I just feel it adds an added complexity to the designing of ships in the beginning. But if you have 5 arsenals then you have ten choices. And little incentive to make a deal with a neighbor to sell weapons back and forth.
Quote from: Nobody on December 16, 2011, 09:13:52 AM
I don't think we should have more than a handful of starting cities. I don't see the space for much more on the map either.
I don't know how much space the cities will take up but I do feel that there should be the opportunity for cities to be widely distributed. Not during the beginning of the game. It seems like 60+ cities in the top right corner is an awful lot, and that is before we begin expanding and before counting NPCs. I think it should be a smaller number like enough economy for 5 industries/cities. We can still have starting economy at $3500+ just make the threshold for industries higher.
Bear in mind, folks, that the top quarter of the map is one quarter of the planet - all of Europe, or the western Pacific. It's not that small a space.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 10:59:33 AM
Bear in mind, folks, that the top quarter of the map is one quarter of the planet - all of Europe, or the western Pacific. It's not that small a space.
That might be true, but our cities will be all coastal, won't they?
Pretty much.
I guess we'll see just how crowded things get.
Quote from: Nobody on December 16, 2011, 09:30:58 AM
For torpedoes that means:
- the smallest torpedos should be allowed to be of ~30 cm diameter and only a few meters in length (think of the very early Whiteheads)
- the biggest torpedos should be allowed to have a diameter of 65 to 70 cm or 28" (think of the Japanese WW2 "long lance" and the German WW1 J/9s)
- 10 m length limit seems reasonable
Carthaginian idea isn't bad, but too simple IMO.
I would expect a torpedo range to be directly proportional to the length and also to the diameter (maybe as a sqare root?). Also important max speed and multiple speed settings (Range~v-2), and warhead size.
I would happily invent a formula and a tool for easy use if you are interested.
Nobody,
I wanted to avoid going into algebra at all costs. I also agree that speed settings, warhead size, etc would vary in real life and have impact on the effectiveness of any torpedo of a given length... but I was hoping to keep the system dirt simple!
I could see having a simple 'range setting' but 1.) I didn't want to make things too complicated for the mods and 2.) I didn't want to make a system that would take weeks to research ad not be ready at the start of the game! Also, I figured that since SpringSharp only uses a certain percentage of the torpedo's weight as an assumption (yeah, that word) of the torpedo's warhead size, that we should standardize on that figure. This would mean that SpringSharp's torpedo estimate would be law, and further simplify the game, the job of the mods simming the game, and the rules needed to govern the game.
I think it would be simplest to just take a good estimate for a range increase r/t speed (say, using the Mk-14's setting ratio and rounding to a good number) and just let warhead size stay constant. I know it doesn't express every possibility, but it is a fairly good compromise between FLEXIBILITY, POSSIBILITY and SIMPLICITY.
Expanding the Upper and Lower limits on size would be possible in the system I had worked out, and indeed might actually be beneficial... I like the idea.
Tonight after work, I'll knock up a version of my rules that will allow for your suggestions.
As for the gun size.... I don't think special rules for mortars are necessary.
With SS3, you can pick the barrel length, and thus building a mortar on your ship is as simple as making the barrel length consistent with a mortar. We would just create an upper limit on barrel size for a mortar of 900mm- this is just under the 36" bore of 'Little David.'
I'd agree that 19" would be as big a gun as I would care to see (actually 18" takes that cake), but if someone wants to try for a nice, round number like a 20" cannon, I could hardly fault them for wanting it... so 500mm as an upper limit sounds nice.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 07:38:08 AM
1. The $20 or less that a player pays for a new city is basically the cost of constructing its basic infrastructure. The civilian sector builds the rest of it. The potential benefits to the player are:
-Physical occupation of the area in which the city is located.
-Decentralizing his economy to additional locations.
-Once the city is large enough, an industry.
While I think the $4000 starting economy is equal to around 20 million people, we aren't going to track population in the game.
No pop, no problem.
Define large enough for industry?
Are we going to track GDP by city? If so is there any reason not to have just one city and just dump all of my GDP into the one city?
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 07:38:08 AM
2. Players will choose the industry of any city they build during play. They will probably also be choosing the industry of their existing cities as the game starts (I might roll some of them - still contemplating). I'll determine NPC industries.
This gives players the possibility of building closed system that don't need to trade.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 07:38:08 AM
3. At the moment, the only form of resource production upgrade is the notion of allowing multiple industries per city. The cost for that is to be determined.
I envision the current industry system to accomplish a couple of things:
-Quantify that the player has or does not have access to key commodities, without getting into the nitty-gritty of how much he has and how much he uses.
-Limit weapons research and construction without applying dollar costs that are, in the grand scheme of things, pretty inconsequential to a player's budget anyway.
-Provide a bit of "color" to the player's nation, by allowing him to determine whether his focus is on military power, trade, or expansion.
If a player desires more industry, then his options are:
-Start with a number of small cities, and let the economy grow until those cities can claim industries
-Start new cities once play begins
-Grab other people's cities.
Any idea as to what the cut off point is to be on resource production to appear?
Here is one thought to think about Rocky. Ditch the GDP / tax system. Instead cities have income in Dollars.
For a base sized city you can add $1 of income for $20 of investment (5% rate of return). After city reaches a certain cut off point you have to start spending more money for each $1 of new income. A case can be made for greater cost efficiency by cramming more people into a given location but to force people to expand you might want other things to happen.
Michael
The motivation for expansion's still a bit unresolved. I've generally assumed it'd be greed for money and power.
Concentration of sites is a problem.
How would you chart the city-growth as you suggest?
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on December 16, 2011, 08:31:04 AM
I'm open to names. I didn't want people getting confused with that television show called "Terra Nova". We could call it, "Rocky's Deathworld Naval Carnage Extravaganza" if y'all wish.
I don't know any TV show with that name, but if you don't want to use it how about:
- Terra Incognita
- Terra Maledicta
- Terra Mala
- Terra Daemonia
- Terra Infesta
- Terra Noxa
- Mundus Novus
- Mundus Maledictus
- Mundus Malus
- Mundus Deamonius
- Mundus Infestus
- Mundus Noxius
- ...
... Google can be really helpful ^^
I still like "Terra Nova" best though.
Terra Nova, Earth 2... that stuff's been done. ;)
Rehashing the name of a planet that lies in their distant past might seem silly to people that came on a slow boat. I say we ditch any reference to Earth-That-Was and let this be something entirely new. Hell, the different peoples of our world might *gasp* have different names by this point (even if they all translate to the same thing).
I suggest that we simply agree that humanity has simply taken to calling this 'the world' and hang the formal name! ;)
...Hmm.
How 'bout Tellus, for the proper name? With 'world' mirroring general usages of 'earth', the way Alpha Centauri used 'planet' to refer to Chiron.
OK... another kick at the can on torpedo rules. I think that covers just about every possible variable that people could want except warhead size, while keeping things as simple and clean as possible. I apologize in advance for any possible 'freaking fractions' or 'damnable decimals' that must be resultantly rounded.
Torpedoes
1.) A torpedo's length is measured by overall length in METERS and the diameter is determined by overall diameter in CENTIMETERS; any non-metric torpedoes will use the nearest length in meters or diameter in millimeters
rounded down for determining their maximum range.
2.) A torpedo must be at least 5m in length but cannot exceed 10m in length. A torpedo will have a
maximum base range (MBR) of
1000m X (length in meters). MBR will be modified by diameter and speed settings, and the modified range can be either <4000m or >10,000m due to these factors.
3.) A torpedo must be at least 350mm in diameter, but can be no larger than 650mm in diameter. Torpedoes will receive the following modifications to MBR according to diameter: 350mm-399mm = -1000m, 400-449mm = -500m, 450mm-549mm = no modifier, 550mm-599mm = +500m, 600mm-650mm = +1000m.
4.) A torpedo's
maximum base speed (MBS) is measured in knots and is determined by its diameter: 350mm-399mm = -10 knots, 400-449mm = -5 knots, 450mm-549mm = 35 knots, 550mm-599mm = +5 knots, 600mm-650mm = +10 knots. Additionally, the torpedo's MBS is modified by the torpedo's overall length, with
each meter over 5m in length adding +1 knot.
5.) A torpedo will have three range settings, which modify its MBR and MBS accordingly. A torpedo's
modified range will be rounded down to the nearest 100m and
modified speed will be rounded down to the nearest 1/4 knot. Slow - +50% range, 75% speed; Normal - no modifier; Fast - -50% range, +34% speed. Range settings must be declared at time of launch, and cannot be changed thereafter.
6.)
Torpedo warhead strength is set by Springsharp estimates. This cannot be modified in any way due to the way that Springsharp estimates the mass of the warhead relative to the overall mass of the torpedo. All torpedoes will use the Springsharp estimate for number of non-critical torpedoes of that size to sink a given ship.
Carth, that's all nice and simple and I like many of your ideas, but what about tech progression?
Oh, and what about different propulsion systems? (wet-heater, pure oxygen, closed loop drive, Walter turbine)
Other notes:
- at 75%(-25%) speed, the range would increase by 77.778% say 75% not 50
- for a 50% reduction in Range I would expect an increase in speed of 40-41%
- an increase in range of 50% would be achieved by a speed of 81-82%(18-19 slower)
- doubling the range could be expected at 70-71% speed
Quote from: Nobody on December 17, 2011, 02:08:17 AM
Carth, that's all nice and simple and I like many of your ideas, but what about tech progression?
Other notes:
- at 75%(-25%) speed, the range would increase by 77.778% say 75% not 50
- for a 50% reduction in Range I would expect an increase in speed of 40-41%
- an increase in range of 50% would be achieved by a speed of 81-82%(18-19 slower)
- doubling the range could be expected at 70-71% speed
I used the base figures for the Mk.14 Mod 3 torp, rounded a bit to make things simpler.
4,500 yards (4,100 m) / 45 knots (my
fast setting)
9,000 yards (8,200 m) / 33.5 knots (my
normal setting)
14,000 yards (12,800 m) / 26.5 knots (my
slow setting)
While the progression doesn't match my percentages
exactly the differences
are small.
I called it close enough for government work and let it be. That's why the figures look like they do; it is not arbitrary or imaginary- it's based on a real torpedo, and one of the most widely deployed in history. I don't think we could come up with a better example of an 'average torpedo.'
Tech progression... I'd simply say that the largest torpedoes must be researched. This would mean that the faster, longer-ranged and more powerful torpedoes would require research, while everything up to a certain point (say, the 500mm-549mm, which would include the 'standard' 533mm size) would be considered 'starter tech.'
Nobody, I understand the desire to make things more complicated in order to bring a greater variety into the sim... but it gets to the point where the quest for options bogs things down so damn much that you never get to play for trying to design the rules.
Anyway, it's 0330 and frankly, I'm too bloody tired to carry on any further.
I'm going to go to sleep now and will be back after I go fishing tomorrow about 1500ish CST.
If you can figure out a fairly simple way to incorporate different propulsion systems, then let me know.
Oh, and why not include compressed air, pre-spun flywheels and batteries for good measure? ;)
Sometimes, it's possible to add so much you spoil the soup.
Yea true it's quite the balancing act between possibilities and playability.
Meanwhile a comparism
G7a
| kn | km | %v | %d | expected | ,,η" | | 30 | 12 | 75% | 160% | 177,8% | 0,9 | | 40 | 7,5 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 1 | | 44 | 6 | 110% | 80% | 82,6% | 0,97 |
Mk.14 Mod 3
| kn | yards | %v | %d | expected | ,,η" | | 26,5 | 14000 | 79% | 156% | 160% | 0,97 | | 33,5 | 9000 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 1 | | 45 | 4500 | 134% | 50% | 55% | 0,9 |
Carthagian
| | | v | d | expected | ,,η" | | | | 75% | 150% | 178% | 0,84 | | | | 134% | 50% | 56% | 0,9 |
So yea its close, but I would say you rounded in the wrong direction(reducing both speed and range for the slow setting) which resulted in me immediately getting the feeling it was too far off. |
Quote from: Nobody on December 17, 2011, 03:17:56 AM
So yea its close, but I would say you rounded in the wrong direction(reducing both speed and range for the slow setting) which resulted in me immediately getting the feeling it was too far off.
Well, it's eventually gonna give someone the screaming heebie-jeebies, so I picked the things that were easiest to make it easier on the mods when it came time for the math. As far as rounding things down... well, that's how Battletech, all ADB games, and (IIRC) Crimson Skies did it, so that's how I did it.
Amazing how much a four hour nap and the possibility of some strangely out-of-season fishing weather can improve your POV.
EDIT: Also (for simplicity's sake) we can say that the slightly lower 'power bands' on my torpedoes are accounted for by the fact that everyone standardized on wakeless electric torpedoes. As the electric motors 1.) make the most sense for propulsion and 2.) would be a more 'mature tech' on our fictional world, it wouldn't be an impossible occurrence. ;)
EDIT, PART DEUX: Wow... only 6% off!
Not bad for a nurse who's only military experience lies on the ground.
Okay I tried something myself... lots of try and error less scientific thinking.
I normed all electric levels (E1-E6). Two pure Oxygen (O1-O2), a closed-loop (C1) and a Walter-turbine (W1) are also fixed. The normal wet-heaters aren't that easy (called them S for steam). S4-S5 are normed to the German G7a and S3 to the British Mark VIII, but it's hardly worse than S4. The earlier level are a mess, couldn't decide which torpedo I should choose for norming. S6 and later are missing, didn't see a post-WW2 wet-heater.
Go and play a bit with the Table1 - then tell me what you think.
I practise it shouldn't be too difficult, any Torpedo is defined by its tech level, caliber, length, warhead weight and the 2 speed settings.
Does everything have to involve a spreadsheet and a table and a dozen examples?
Frankly, I know not a damnable thing about Excel, man... not a sausage.
What I see here makes no sense as an outline for a ruleset. I see a lot of statistics but absolutely nothing regarding how they would work within gameplay. As you have included nothing practicable about how the table was assembled- neither instructions nor intent- no one can follow what you are doing.
All I can identify for certain is that you have left out the torpedo that I did include in my relatively easy attempt at a well-explained, plainly laid out ruleset (why?). If you can present me with something akin to what I presented then I'll be able look at it, see where you are going with the idea, and be able to tell you more about what I tihnk is good and bad about it.
It's really not that I damn well don't appreciate the effort... it's just I have no idea what the hell is going on there without some kind of explanation that extends beyond 'I created a table with a bunch of examples and some numbers and stuff.'
English, man... plain English, with words and not spreadsheets.
That's how someone old-fashioned like me rolls. :-[
Sorry didn't think about that. (It appears all so obvious if you made it yourself)
I chose the German ones, because
- the data was easier to find (at least for me)
- the data I found was more consistent. For your US(?) Mark 14 for example, I found vastly different speed settings and ranges.
I also though it would be useful to look at the progression of a single country, so that I can actually see the improvements between generations and can decide were to draw the line.
The examples were not intended to examples. Its just what I used to calibrate the thing.
USAGE
Go to Table1 and search for an empty line (e.g. 27, 30 or 35) or delete everything between A11 and G40.
Go back to column A. Insert a name or description.
Column B: choose a tech level (I explained in my last post which work). You can also see a very short description what they are supposed mean in the "Tech Level" table.
Column C: input desired torpedo diameter/caliber in mm. (I added also added a useful metric/imperial calculator on the top.) There are NO hard caps limiting your choice. There are, however, a few soft-caps which make very small and very large torpedoes undesirable.
Column D: enter torpedo length in m. Check column L too see if you overdid it.
Column E: choose warhead weight in kg. Check column N if your choice was reasonable.
Column F: enter absolute maximum speed of the Torpedo. Check column M.
Column G: choose a low speed setting if desired.
Read range results in columns H and I (in meter).
Now an example:
Mk.14 Mod 3
as S4(early WW2 model): 3265 m @45 kn, 5748 m @33.5 kn and 8499 m @26.5 kn
as S5(late WW2 model): 4456 m @45 kn, 7845 m @33,5 kn and 11599 m @26,5 kn
--> the estimate is a bit low for the low speeds and somewhere between the two for max speed.
Why excel? It just like saying "we use SpringSharp for ships". You don't need to know what's happening inside.
English is fine, but numbers don't have to be translated. If I tried to explain what this thing does, than I'm sure most people would fall asleep reading it and not understand a word. It basically tries do to everything written here, and a bit more. There are even a couple of your ideas, that survived testing, in there!
Im going to side with Carth on this one. While being able to make custom torps would be nice, it is easyer to go with the default SS warhead for the purpace of siming combat. Carth's rules give a good enough approximation for our purpaces. Keeping the program required to just SS as opposed to forcing excel or an equivalent into the list is best for keeping new people who want to play around. The reports are almost to the point where one needs a spreadsheet to do them as is. Why does every little thing within the sim need its own spreadsheet to do?
Try to explain it to me... I'm not a moron, I'm just not a programer. :)
If you have a method, you can put it into words and they can be understood by all who take the time to read and reference- just throwing a spreadsheet at us and expecting us to 'tinker with it' is a bit condescending. It essentially takes everyone else out of the process, and hangs the entire process of building the rules on the person building the spreadsheet.
Let's hash this thing out in words and numbers, out in the open... then if a spreadsheet is the easiest way to organize the process, we can all see 1.) where things started 2.) where they went 3.) how they work together and 4.) what's going on inside.
It's a lot better when folks know how the system works before they are told to play with the system.
Also, out of curiosity, which of my ideas are in there... as I can't navigate that thing with a map and compass.
PS... I understand that you are European and that figures for German torps are probably more available- but there is American Torpedo Information at NavWeaps.com (http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/index_weapons.htm) if you want to think about adding some American torps. The secret is to pick one set of range figures from one source, and stick with it... not to get distracted by the fact that you have many different estimates on many separate websites. After all, the same is true for every torpedo, as I have seen many different quotes on German torps.
Quote from: Carthaginian on December 17, 2011, 03:21:42 PM
Try to explain it to me... I'm not a moron, I'm just not a programer. :)
If you have a method, you can put it into words and they can be understood by all who take the time to read and reference- just throwing a spreadsheet at us and expecting us to 'tinker with it' is a bit condescending. It essentially takes everyone else out of the process, and hangs the entire process of building the rules on the person building the spreadsheet.
Okay I will try to explain a couple of ideas, but not what/how it is actually done. Btw, shouldn't we split this?
Idea 1) physics. v~P³. Range~1/v²...
Idea 2) different propulsion types at several tech-levels with different advantages and disadvantages.
Idea 3) Range depends on amount of energy (fuel) stored inside. Space is shared with warhead, engine and steering/homing equipment. Higher speed -> bigger engine less fuel. If the engine and warhead get too big the range becomes negative.
Idea 4) if the speed is different from the optimum the efficiency drops.
Idea 5) a flexible cap on the torpedo's length to diameter ratio. That is a tiny torpedo can be longer than a big one - relatively.
6) check if the warhead size is reasonable.
7) estimate the torpedo's weight.
8) I sure there was more... need sleep.
Quote
Let's hash this thing out in words and numbers, out in the open... then if a spreadsheet is the easiest way to organize the process, we can all see 1.) where things started 2.) where they went 3.) how they work together and 4.) what's going on inside.
It's a lot better when folks know how the system works before they are told to play with the system.
I disagree. I think it better to test something you don't know how it works and be surprised by the results (positive or negative), than explicitly test the limits.
Quote
Also, out of curiosity, which of my ideas are in there... as I can't navigate that thing with a map and compass.
The maximum allowed speed of the torpedo is affected almost as you described it under #4 (that is column H on the "internal" page). However, I had to add (well sub actually) a term that prevents big torpedos from going like 100 kn as standard.
Nobody... you are kidding, right? You planning on copywriting this spreadsheet or something?
In plain English, explain how this works. Quit dodging the question. As for splitting... that is up to Rocky, as he's organizing the reboot and the final arbiter of rules.
QuoteOkay I will try to explain a couple of ideas, but not what/how it is actually done. Btw, shouldn't we split this?
It is becoming less like you are UNABLE to explain what you are doing in the spreadsheet, and is very very rapidly starting to look like you are UNWILLING. If you are going to totally discount the validity of discussion and critique of YOUR process in the same manner that you are wanting to discuss and critique SOMEONE ELSE'S process... then, frankly, I will simply ignore your suggestions and spreadsheet until you give me the same kind of totally out-in-the-open explanation of your proposed rule system which I have so courteously given you.
Thank you for your understanding.
Going to my brother's place for a Star Wars Saga game. Back at some time tonight.
Quote from: Carthaginian on December 17, 2011, 04:03:56 PM
In plain English, explain how this works. Quit dodging the question. As for splitting... that is up to Rocky, as he's organizing the reboot and the final arbiter of rules.[..]
It is becoming less like you are UNABLE to explain what you are doing in the spreadsheet, and is very very rapidly starting to look like you are UNWILLING. If you are going to totally discount the validity of discussion and critique of YOUR process in the same manner that you are wanting to discuss and critique SOMEONE ELSE'S process... then, frankly, I will simply ignore your suggestions and spreadsheet until you give me the same kind of totally out-in-the-open explanation of your proposed rule system which I have so courteously given you.
Thank you for your understanding.
Going to my brother's place for a Star Wars Saga game. Back at some time tonight.
Well English is part of the problem and I won't be able to give longer answer today(my time).
I will gladly explain my ideas, however be a bit more specific. Are there, of the ideas posted above, some I don't need to explain? Which of the concepts (you do not understand) do you want me to explain first?
Quote from: Nobody on December 17, 2011, 04:18:02 PM
Quote from: Carthaginian on December 17, 2011, 04:03:56 PM
In plain English, explain how this works. Quit dodging the question. As for splitting... that is up to Rocky, as he's organizing the reboot and the final arbiter of rules.[..]
It is becoming less like you are UNABLE to explain what you are doing in the spreadsheet, and is very very rapidly starting to look like you are UNWILLING. If you are going to totally discount the validity of discussion and critique of YOUR process in the same manner that you are wanting to discuss and critique SOMEONE ELSE'S process... then, frankly, I will simply ignore your suggestions and spreadsheet until you give me the same kind of totally out-in-the-open explanation of your proposed rule system which I have so courteously given you.
Thank you for your understanding.
Going to my brother's place for a Star Wars Saga game. Back at some time tonight.
Well English is part of the problem and I won't be able to give longer answer today(my time).
I will gladly explain my ideas, however be a bit more specific. Are there, of the ideas posted above, some I don't need to explain? Which of the concepts (you do not understand) do you want me to explain first?
Ich sprechen eine bischen Deutsch... though if you want me to do something other than 1.) read a train schedule, 2.) drive somewhere 3.) translate street signs for a traffic report or 4.) bail some dumbass out of jail for roll call- well, I'm pretty limited.
What do I want explained?
I want your process explained as well as I explained mine, and as easily understood. I don't want to know where you plug it in the spreadsheet, I want to know what happens when you plug those numbers into the spreadsheet. I want to know what makes it work.
What do I want explained first?
I want the first step explained first. Then I want the second, third and fourth steps explained... right on down to the last step. I want them laid out as clearly and concisely as I laid my process out- and just because it isn't simple doesn't mean it can't be clear.
What concepts do I want explained?
I want ALL the concepts explained- not for me in particular.... I want it where EVERYONE can see what's going on and come in and look at things. I want everything explained for everyone's sake.
Time out, guys. Ease up.
Here's a diversion from that, then: are Armory Slots required for the production of ground-forces' small arms? If so, is that 1 slot per pistol/rifle/LMG/whatever, or 'This slot produces your army's guns'? What is the cut-off point between 'Small Arms' and 'Guns'?
My favored approach would be to say that 'as many small arms as you need' collectively occupy one Armory Slot, and that the they be defined as 'weapons of 1" bore or smaller'.
I like the idea of City Construction not providing the population and economy to fill the new settlement 'gracis' because if it did, then the 'optimum' thing to do would be to concentrate everything on building new cities and outgrowing everyone around you to the point that the military technology used will be completely irrelevant. This might be just the thing in a 4X game, but I really don't think it's consistent with either our 'reality guideline' principles or the idea that military design should be a key focus point. If we then go with the idea that we shouldn't be able to grow 'at will', then I think that the GNP/percentage system is a good way to handle it.
Quote from: Valles on December 18, 2011, 12:34:23 PM
Here's a diversion from that, then: are Armory Slots required for the production of ground-forces' small arms? If so, is that 1 slot per pistol/rifle/LMG/whatever, or 'This slot produces your army's guns'? What is the cut-off point between 'Small Arms' and 'Guns'?
My favored approach would be to say that 'as many small arms as you need' collectively occupy one Armory Slot, and that the they be defined as 'weapons of 1" bore or smaller'.
I was wondering this same thing myself. My opinion is that you set an armory for "army production" and it manufactures all the lighter weapons your military forces need up to a limit of (as an example) 1 company per 4 month turn. Which means you can only equip 1 new company per 4 month turn, or 3 companies each year. You could thus buy surplus equipment capacity from an ally if you wanted to equip more than 1 company per turn. This would also prevent people from having one arsenal devoted to military production and equipping a brigade of 15 companies. It is one thing to be able to afford to equip them but another to have the excess capacity to produce the equipment. And I'm assuming vehicles count as "equipment" on par with weapons for simplicity purposes, although if it was desired we could call for both a military equipment arsenal and a military vehicles arsenal. I would prefer one arsenal for both with the limitation of equipping just one company per turn.
I also think that even lighter naval guns like 3in/4.7in/etc should be produced in an armory as well. And just like the army equipment arsenal for weapons between 1.0in and 2.9in weapons should have an arsenal devoted to them. Which means that for guns between 1.0in and 2.9in a designer can have as much variety as he wants if he possess one arsenal. I can elaborate if need be.
Quote from: Darman on December 18, 2011, 01:16:34 PM
Quote from: Valles on December 18, 2011, 12:34:23 PM
My favored approach would be to say that 'as many small arms as you need' collectively occupy one Armory Slot, and that the they be defined as 'weapons of 1" bore or smaller'.
My opinion is that you set an armory for "army production" and it manufactures all the lighter weapons your military forces need up to a limit of (as an example) 1 company per 4 month turn. Which means you can only equip 1 new company per 4 month turn, or 3 companies each year.
Darman, a blowback operated SMG of .380 ACP/9mm Kurz can be built out of stuff you can scavenge in a junkyard using nothing more than a well-equipped trade school machine shop. A dozen determined men in that situation could build enough weapons to outfit a company of soldiers in 4 months; they do it all the time in places like Chechnya, Pakistan and Afghanistan in far worse conditions. The weapons won't (usually) be armory-quality, granted, but they can be effective (and occasionally, damn near professional quality).
I'm leaning towards Valles' suggestion that one 'Small Arms Armory' can build 'enough' weapons to supply any amount of personal weapons. Take a look at the output of a a major arms manufacturer over the course of a year. Literally thousands of firearms come out one of their facilities each year.
One facility for Marine Corps production should be sufficient.
I do agree with you, though, on the idea that perhaps one facility should be sufficient for the smallest bore naval weapons- like anything =/<57mm.
Darman, you're suggesting that Armories be allowed to produce 'any gun smaller than 1in' or 'any gun between 1in and 3in' or 'military vehicles of any sort' or 'any two specific gun designs larger than 3in'?
I figure, personally, that a 25mm autocannon firing explosive rounds should be enough gun for even a truly honked off sauropod-equivalent, which is why I drew the 'small arms' line there. Complexity or difficulty of production, I don't know anything about and therefore didn't factor in.
Quote from: Valles on December 18, 2011, 02:14:20 PM
I figure, personally, that a 25mm autocannon firing explosive rounds should be enough gun for even a truly honked off sauropod-equivalent, which is why I drew the 'small arms' line there. Complexity or difficulty of production, I don't know anything about and therefore didn't factor in.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_2cm-70_mk234_gun_diagram_pic.jpg
The Oerlikon 20mm that the USN used seems to be a pretty damn simple weapon. Though it will require some pretty damn heavy equipment for the dealing with steel of the necessary strength... well, the machining doesn't look to be that complex.
In fact, here's the whole "-10 TM" (basic level operator's manual) for the weapon, if anyone is interested.
If sufficient materials were available, this looks simple enough to make enough to put one in every squad of troops a NewWorld nation might be able to field.
Quote from: Carthaginian on December 18, 2011, 01:39:44 PM
Quote from: Darman on December 18, 2011, 01:16:34 PM
Quote from: Valles on December 18, 2011, 12:34:23 PM
My favored approach would be to say that 'as many small arms as you need' collectively occupy one Armory Slot, and that the they be defined as 'weapons of 1" bore or smaller'.
My opinion is that you set an armory for "army production" and it manufactures all the lighter weapons your military forces need up to a limit of (as an example) 1 company per 4 month turn. Which means you can only equip 1 new company per 4 month turn, or 3 companies each year.
Darman, a blowback operated SMG of .380 ACP/9mm Kurz can be built out of stuff you can scavenge in a junkyard using nothing more than a well-equipped trade school machine shop. A dozen determined men in that situation could build enough weapons to outfit a company of soldiers in 4 months; they do it all the time in places like Chechnya, Pakistan and Afghanistan in far worse conditions. The weapons won't (usually) be armory-quality, granted, but they can be effective (and occasionally, damn near professional quality).
I'm leaning towards Valles' suggestion that one 'Small Arms Armory' can build 'enough' weapons to supply any amount of personal weapons. Take a look at the output of a a major arms manufacturer over the course of a year. Literally thousands of firearms come out one of their facilities each year.
One facility for Marine Corps production should be sufficient.
I do agree with you, though, on the idea that perhaps one facility should be sufficient for the smallest bore naval weapons- like anything =/<57mm.
There is a difference between a Khyber Pass setup and a full arms factory. One is hand made copies while the other are massed produce. You can have garbage quality at either so I will ignore quality issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khyber_Pass_Copy
Michael
Michael,
I am more than well aware of the 'Khyber Pass ' nickname of hand-made gun.
I have actually laid hands on some... the poorer sort.
The Webley in the article looks spot-on (and I'm a Webley owner), they even have the patent stamp in the right place! Were it not for the lack of arsenal markings, this could probably pass for genuine- and possibly would if you handed it to some pawnbrokers.
The Webley is where I'm going with the conversation- or at least down the correct street, but not quite far enough to find the right block. Once these weapons are manufactured in large quantities and possess interchangeable parts (which some do), the line between 'home-made copy' and 'mass produced' begins to blur more than a little. The only thing that separates some of these guys from small-scale legitimate arms manufacturers is a wink and nod from their respective governments!
Now, explain to me the difference between a small shop making weapons with interchangeability and a 'factory-produced' firearm. Sure, the small shop has men who actually pass the parts from station to station, but they are still making the same kind of product to the same standards. Anyone with a lathe, a drill press, a good metal saw, and some hand tools can make firearms that are serviceable.
Add in properly mounted and leveled machine tools, of the sort which exist in most technical schools in the United States, you can begin making things that are interchangeable. Remember, by this point you are already dealing with equipment that is light-years above that which, say, the Springfield Armory had when it opened. Granted, this setup is missing a button rifler... but so was the Springfield Armory. Of course, you can buy those... Rifling Machines for Sale (http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/machinery-sale-wanted/l-r-b-button-machine-bore-reamer-sale-217881/), these were for sale for $10k per copy- a bit steep, but very available.
Now that you have the button rifling machine, you are able to make rifled weapons. You're still probably heating the metal with a bed of hot coals and some 'by gosh and golly'- but even this is tolerable if you know the alloy content of the steel. With this knowledge and a decent way to measure the temperature of your annealing/tempering processes, you can get a general idea of your progress by the color of the metal during the process... after all, this is how it was done for centuries! At this stage, if you have decent equipment and good masters, you are essentially manufacturing factory-grade arms on a small scale.
I don't think that it really matters either way; we are, after all, talking about factories - facilities and personnel capable of turning out indefinite numbers of weapons that may weigh more than the entire shops you're arguing over. These are fully professional operations - and from what you're saying, what I'm taking away is that the scale of operation needed to turn out, say, four or five different models of man-portable weapon in quantities of hundreds-to-low-thousands can easily fit in the floorspace that would be needed to build 12in guns, given how much less is needed to produce only dozens.
Quote from: Valles on December 18, 2011, 07:26:33 PM
...what I'm taking away is that the scale of operation needed to turn out, say, four or five different models of man-portable weapon in quantities of hundreds-to-low-thousands can easily fit in the floorspace that would be needed to build 12in guns, given how much less is needed to produce only dozens.
And I fully agree with you.
The only reason I brought up shop-built weapons was to illustrate to Darman that you were right that only a single small arms factory was necessary to build as many weapons as any military might need... because a determined group of men in a shop could build serviceable weapons in the numbers he was talking about in a matter of months.
On torpedoes: I'd prefer some standardization. A basic table for the usual sizes, with three options:
-Short range, big warhead
-Medium range, medium warhead
-Long range, small warhead
Submarine torpedoes can simply use the short range and medium warhead of the above.
On arsenals: No, I did not think it was really necessary to have slots for small arms.
I agree with Rocky,
Globaly I hope to have realist , simple & not 25 pages of rules with calculation boards everywhere.
Use standardisation & NavWeapons armament...I think.
Jef ;)
Something just crossed my mind and I would like to hear your opinions.
In this world we're just rediscovering how to build (military) ships from history books, right? However, a lot of thing you need on a larger ship can't be found in books, especially if they become bigger you need to put more and more thought into thing you might not realized are even there.
Therefore I propose a tech tree limiting the size of ships, to like 200, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, 16000, 24000, 36000, 54000... tons. I would choose max displacement, but that doesn't really matter and civil freighters should be allowed to be several times bigger as they consist mostly out of cargo space.
I would expect the technology for the next step in size to be available around the time were the first ship that approaches the limit is launched, so we should be able to lay down something that resembles a cruiser, after building coast patrol ships, in the second year.
I see where you are coming from but I want to avoid artificial constraints on ship size where possible (granted, it is not always possible...)
I could entertain a higher cost to build larger ships at first, though.